1. education
2. english as a second language

International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies Vol:1, Issue: 3
An Exploration of English Language Teaching Pedagogy………
Al-Sohbani, Y. A.
An Exploration of English Language Teaching Pedagogy in Secondary Yemeni
Education: A Case Study
Yehia Ahmed Y. Al-Sohbani
Department of English Studies
Facult y o f Arts
Ibb Universit y
Yemen
Abstract
The teaching o f English at the Yemeni public schools has been crit icized as ineffect ive
due to the poor level o f the language co mpetency of mo st school leavers though they
spend six years studying English whose curriculum, according to Bose (2002), is largely
based on the Communicat ive Language Teaching (CLT). In this respect, this paper mainly
attempted to: 1) investigate Yemeni English teachers’ classroom teaching pract ices in
secondary schools, (2) Explore the Yemeni teachers’ awareness o f CLT, and 3) explore
the constraints teachers face while implement ing the CLT. The results of the study
indicate that the Grammar Translat ion Method (GTM) is the predominant pedagogy
practiced by the EFL teachers participated in this study. The use o f the mother-tongue,
both by teachers and students were noticed to be the prevailing. The meanings o f words
are given in Arabic and the teachers do not focus on developing students’ fluency rather
they focus on grammar. The result s also show that the part icipants do not have a clear cut
idea regarding the principles and concepts of CLT and are not clear about what they do in
the classroom. The constraints faced by the participants while implement ing CLT are also
investigated and presented in the paper.
Key words: CLT, GTM, Yemeni public schools, Teachers’ awareness, pedagogy
Suggested Citation:
Al-Sohbani, Y. A. (2013). An Explorat ion o f English Language Teaching Pedagogy in
Secondary Yemeni Educat ion: A Case Study. International Journal of English Language
& Translation Studies Vol-1, Issue-3 , 41-57. Retrived fro m http://www.eltsjournal.org
International Refereed & Indexed Journal of English Language & Translation Studies
ISSN: 2308-5460
October-December, 2013
www.eltsjournal.org
P a ge | 4 1
International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies Vol:1, Issue: 3
An Exploration of English Language Teaching Pedagogy………
Al-Sohbani, Y. A.
1. Introduction
It is observed that the issue of teaching English in Yemeni secondary schools is
considered, to a large extent, one of the major concerns o f the Ministry o f Education due
to the status of English language locally and internat ionally. The qualit y o f teaching
English in classrooms can really be an influential factor which may affect students’
mot ivat ion and attitudes regarding learning English (Al-Sohbani, 1997). It is held that
most English teachers seem to use inappropriate methods and techniques o f language
teaching in general and not implement ing CLT, though English text books in Yemeni
public schools are based on it. Many ELT scho lars (Munby, 1978; Widdowson, 1978;
Littlewood, 1981; Johnson, 1982; Brumfit, 1984; Yalden, 1987; Nunan, 1989; Berns,
1990; Lee & VanPatten, 1995; Richards, 2006) have regarded this as an ideal approach.
Al-Shamiry(2000) and Thabet (2002) point out that Yemeni English Language teachers
are not aware of EFL methods in general and the principles o f CLT, in particular.
According to Al-Shamiry (2000), structure-based methods are dominant in Yemeni
schools. Similarly, Bataineh, Bataineh and Thabet (2011) report that “Yemeni teachers are
more inclined towards structure-based principles than those of CLT” (p.865). They also
conclude that the Yemeni English teachers are considerably “knowledgeable of the
principles o f CLT”; however, they do not reflect that in their classroom pract ice (p. 859).
Students who enroll in the English Depart ment after graduating fro m the schools, for
example, generally show a vivid poor level o f English proficiency. This low level is
probably due to various ineffect ive language teaching methods and techniques such as
focusing on language structure and using Arabic etc. Based on the experience o f the
researcher, it is noticed that the teachers of English deal wit h students tradit ionally. This
does not help in increasing their interest and inspirat ion. Thus, it can be said that the
teaching English in Yemen is mainly teacher-centered where the teacher seems to do the
most talking and always has the who le class under his/her control. Wit h such background,
the present study attempts to investigate Yemeni English teachers’ classroom teaching
practices in secondary schools focusing on their awareness o f CLT and the constraints
they experience while implement ing the CLT.
2. Related Literature Review
Learning as a foreign language requires taking the language teaching methods into
account. Here, it is worthwhile to briefly review the most commo nly used methods of
language teaching. While do ing so, the focus will be on the CLT as it is considered the
worldwide ideal approach that should be fo llowed by English language teachers in the
globe and due to the fact that it is the method that Yemeni English text books are based on.
2.1 The grammar-translation method (GTM)
According to Hubbard, Jones, Thronton & Wheeler (1983), the Grammar Translat ion
Method "consists o f giving the students grammat ical rules and paradigms. Paradigms are
lists o f forms arranged according to a grammatical pattern" (p.23). In this method,
students are also given lists of vocabulary together with their translated equivalents in the
mother tongue. The students are tested on their knowledge about the facts of the language.
International Refereed & Indexed Journal of English Language & Translation Studies
ISSN: 2308-5460
October-December, 2013
www.eltsjournal.org
P a ge | 4 2
International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies Vol:1, Issue: 3
An Exploration of English Language Teaching Pedagogy………
Al-Sohbani, Y. A.
Historically, this method (GTM) was fo llowed by the oral or the natural method called the
direct method.
2.2 Direct Method
According to (Hubbard et al. 1983), the direct method developed as a react ion to the
grammat ical translat ion method (p. 34). The idea behind this method is that students learn
a language by listening first and then speaking. The learners are engaged in conversat ion.
Reading and writ ing can be developed later. The third one is the audio-lingual method.
2.3 Audio-lingual Method
The word audio-lingual means listening-speaking. This method consists entirely o f drilling
one form or another.
2.4 Communicative Language Teaching
According to McDonough and Shaw (2003), the Communicat ive Language Teaching or
CLT came as a result o f the dissat isfactions wit h the pract ices of previous teaching
methods. Richards and Rodgers (2001) add that CLT was a response to the language
teaching st yles of the 1970s, which mainly used to focus on grammar. This percept ion is
similar to that of Larsen-Freeman (2000) who remarks that some educators has observed
that the previous language teaching methods had succeeded in engendering students to “
produce sentences accurately in a lesson, but could not use them appropriately when
genuinely co mmunicat ing outside of the classroom” (p.121). Similarly, Howatt (1984)
argues that "the original mot ivat ion for adopting a communicat ive approach in the early
sevent ies was remedial, an attempt to overcome the inadequacies o f exist ing, structural
syllabuses, materials, and methods" (p. 287). This failure led to the development of the
CLT. Richards and Rodgers (2001) argue that “the emphasis in the co mmunicat ive
language teaching on the processes o f co mmunication, rather than mastery o f language
forms, leads to different roles for learners fro m those found in more tradit ional second
language classrooms” (p. 166).
The CLT first emerged in the 1970s due to the increase o f immigrat ion in Europe as well
as the need for workers to communicate with their emplo yers (Savitri, 2010). It was
especially applied in Britain, North America, and Australasia, where language learning
process took place in small classes through group and pair work and where English
teachers were aware of adopting a skill-based, discovery-oriented, collaborative approach
to education (Holliday, 1994). Knight (2007: 155) considers CLT “the current dominant
methodology” in teaching English as a foreign language. It is acknowledged as a
widespread effect ive method that helps students to be invo lved in real communication
(Cook, 2005) and, according to Kumaravadivelu (1993), it has become the dynamic power
that shapes the planning, implementation, and evaluat ion o f English language teaching
(ELT) programmers nearly in all parts of the world.
The CLT aims to prepare learners for long term goals, i.e. to develop communicat ive
competence (Hymes, 1972; Richards, Platt, & Platt, 1992) rather than with short term
goals, the immediate classroom tasks. The co mmunicat ive co mpetence means to be able to
use the language appropriately in a given social context. In the words of Hedge (2000), “it
means to know a language and to be able to put that knowledge to use in co mmunicat ing
International Refereed & Indexed Journal of English Language & Translation Studies
ISSN: 2308-5460
October-December, 2013
www.eltsjournal.org
P a ge | 4 3
International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies Vol:1, Issue: 3
An Exploration of English Language Teaching Pedagogy………
Al-Sohbani, Y. A.
with people in a variet y of settings and situations” (p.45). For Savignon (1987),
communicat ive co mpetence is:
The knowledge o f socio linguist ic rules or the appropriateness of an utterance,
in addit io n to knowledge o f grammar rules, the term has co me to be used in
language teaching contexts to refer to the abilit y to negotiate meaning- to
successfully co mbine knowledge of linguist ic, socio linguist ic, and discourse
rules in co mmunicat ive interact ions (p. 235).
This requires the knowledge of the linguist ic form, meanings and funct ions. Students are
supposed to be able to manage the process of negotiat ing meaning wit h their
classmates (Knight, 2007). Thus, negotiat ing o f meaning requires the teacher to create
communicat ive situat ion that oblige learners to try to make themselves understand “by
speaking slowly, for example, or repeating or clarifying their ideas through rephrasing”
(Hedge, 2000, p.13).
The CLT is a method which makes students use the target language a great deal through
practicing and co mmunicat ing meaningfully in different contexts and in different roles by
being invo lved in various co mmunicative act ivities such as group works, pair works,
language games, simulat ions, problem-so lving tasks and by encouraging learners first to
develop fluency; each of these act ivit ies is done with a co mmunicat ive purpose (Larsenfreeman, 2000). Su (1990), after reviewing research and literature related to CLT,
concludes that role-play might be a valuable and valid means for helping students gain
communicat ive co mpetence in the classroom because it provides EFL learners wit h a
close-to-real-life speaking situation conducive to the development of oral co mmunicat ive
skills. Richards (2006: 20) considers carrying out activit ies in pair and says that the groupwork will benefit the learners to:
 Learn from hearing the language used by other members of the group.
 Produce a greater amount of language than they would use in teacher-fronted
activit ies.
 Increase their motivat ional level.
 Have the chance to develop fluency.
Thus, the learner-centered approach is promoted and fluency is first encouraged. Here
learner-centeredness is enhanced by providing opportunit ies in the classroom where,
according to Littlejo hn (1985), learners are act ively invo lved and where teacher’s talking
time is minimized. In accordance wit h this view, learners can show considerably
remarkable motivation and enthusiasm when a less do minant teacher in the classroom
allows learners to become more invo lved in using the target language as it “is a vehicle of
communicat ion, not just an object to be studied” (Larsen-freeman, 2000, p. 132) . Fluency,
before accuracy, is reco mmended in the CLT. It is believed that accuracy is developed
through fluency. To facilitate the development of fluency, learners’ errors, therefore, are
overlooked especially at the init ial stages o f language teaching and learning. A
communicat ive classroom is regarded as a place where the target language is utilized
rather than a place where learners are passive and are required to learn and give correct
answers.
International Refereed & Indexed Journal of English Language & Translation Studies
ISSN: 2308-5460
October-December, 2013
www.eltsjournal.org
P a ge | 4 4
International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies Vol:1, Issue: 3
An Exploration of English Language Teaching Pedagogy………
Al-Sohbani, Y. A.
The roles of the teacher in the CLT have changed fro m being an informat ion and rules
provider, to being a mo nitor, stimulator, manager, model, social worker, a friend,
communicat ion process facilit ator, classroom participant and observer, researcher, needs
analyst, a student counselor, and a group organiser (Prodromou, 1991; Richards &
Rodgers, 2001; Knight, 2007).
Brown (2001) also gives six characterist ics as a descript ion of the CLT:
 Classroom goals are focused on all of the components (grammat ical, discourse,
funct ional, socio linguist ic, and strategic) o f co mmunicat ive competence. Goals,
therefore, must intertwine the organizat ional aspects of language wit h the
pragmat ic.
 Language techniques are designed to engage learners in the pragmat ic, authent ic,
funct ional use of language for meaningful purposes. Organizat ional language
forms are not the central focus, but rather aspects of language that enable learner to
accomplish those purposes.
 Fluency and accuracy are seen as complementary principles underlying
communicat ive techniques. At times fluency may have to take on more importance
than accuracy in order to keep learners meaningfully engaged in language use.
 Students in a co mmunicat ive class ult imately have to use language, productively and
receptively, in unrehearsed contexts outside the classroom. Classroom tasks must
therefore equip students wit h the skills necessary for communicat ion in those
contexts.
 Students are given opportunit ies to focus on their own learning process through an
understanding of their own styles of learning and through the development of
appropriate strategies for autonomous learning.
 The role of the teacher is that of facilit ator and guide, not an all-knowing bestower
of knowledge. Students are therefore encouraged to construct meaning through
genuine linguist ic interaction with others (p. 43).
Reservat ion about the concept of CLT, however, has been raised. Richards and Rodgers
(2001:172) suggest that CLT “refers to a diverse set of principles that reflect a
communicat ive view o f language and language learning”. Similarly, Ellis (1982: 73)
argues that the CLT is used to cover a variety of approaches. This might have led
Omaggio (2000) to say that “CLT represents a repertoire of teaching ideas rather than a
fixed set of methodological procedures, and as such is not easily defined or evaluated”(p.
18). Thompson (1996:10) gives four of the main misconcept ions, which led teachers to
crit icize or reject CLT as fo llows:
 CLT means not teaching grammar
 CLT means teaching only speaking
 CLT means pair work, which means ro le-play
 CLT means expecting too much fro m the teacher.
Thus, problems, with implement ing CLT in EFL classrooms, have been dealt wit h by
many concerned educators (Yu, 2001; Liao, 2000; Li, 1998; Ellis, 1996). Kumaravadivelu
(1993) attributes such problems to the failure o f the teacher trainers to equip teachers wit h
International Refereed & Indexed Journal of English Language & Translation Studies
ISSN: 2308-5460
October-December, 2013
www.eltsjournal.org
P a ge | 4 5
International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies Vol:1, Issue: 3
An Exploration of English Language Teaching Pedagogy………
Al-Sohbani, Y. A.
the skills and techniques they need. Karavas-Doukas (1996) conducted a study on 101
secondary school teachers o f English in Greece and concluded that part of the problem
was due to instructors’ misunderstanding o f the nature of CLT. Nakata (1990) pointed out
that the difficult ies of the implementation o f CLT in Japan were due to reasons such as
syllabus design, testing system, co mmunicat ive inco mpetence o f the teachers, large
classes, and cultural inappropriacy of CLT. Hu (2002) listed similar reasons faced while
adopting CLT in China such as- “lack of necessary resources, big class size, limited
instructional time, teachers’ lack of language proficiency and socio linguist ic co mpetence,
examinat ion pressure, and cultural factors” (p. 94). Also, learners’ resistance as well as
low English pro ficiency hinders teachers fro m implement ing CLT (Yu, 2001; Liao, 2003;
Liao, 2006; Tsai, 2007).
3. The Present Study
3.1. The Statement of the Problem
Alt hough English text books in Yemeni public schools are, to a large extent,
communicat ively oriented and students in these schools study English for six years, most
of them are unable to use the language for communicat ive purposes even after graduating
fro m secondary school. This low level is probably due to various ineffect ive language
teaching methods and techniques such as focusing on language structure and using Arabic.
Researchers, who experienced learning English in school (Al-Shamiry, 2000; Thabet,
2011).Al-Qahtani (2009), assert that communicat ion, language act ivit ies and listening are
missing in the classroom. In this regard, exploring what language teaching methods are
implemented in the teaching of English in schools seems necessary. Thus, attempt is made
to invest igate this problem so that the findings o f this study may enlighten and provoke the
ministry of educat ion represented by supervisors, trainers and so on in order to rethink on
this problem.
3.2. Aims of the Study
This paper principally aims to invest igate Yemeni English teachers’ classroom teaching
practices, i.e., exploring the method(s) and techniques the Yemeni teachers fo llow in
general and CLT, in particular, in public secondary schools. Further more, this paper also
aims to explore the Yemeni English teachers’ awareness o f CLT and the constraints the y
face while implement ing the CLT.
3.3. Research Questions
The paper attempts to find answers to the fo llowing research quest ionsWhat are the Yemeni English teachers’ classroom teaching pract ices in secondary
schools?
To what extent are the Yemeni English language teachers aware of the CLT?
What are the constraints that act against the implementation o f the CLT in the Yemeni
secondary school context?
3.4. Limitation of the Study
Due to the size o f the samples o f the teachers as well as the schools, the result s o f study
are limit ed to the surveyed schools in the selected district, in Ibb governorate, at the
International Refereed & Indexed Journal of English Language & Translation Studies
ISSN: 2308-5460
October-December, 2013
www.eltsjournal.org
P a ge | 4 6
International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies Vol:1, Issue: 3
An Exploration of English Language Teaching Pedagogy………
Al-Sohbani, Y. A.
secondary public schools (grades 10-12). However, the findings gained fro m this study
can be taken into account in other similar Yemeni schools.
4. The Methodology
This study is based on the qualitat ive approach. Miles and Huberman (1994) argue that
“qualitat ive data provide thick descript ions that are vivid, nested in a real context, and
have a ring o f truth that has strong impact on the reader” (p.10). Guided by Sapsford and
Jupp (1996), classroom observat ion was primarily done and fo llowed by the interviews in
order to strengthen the study and to ensure its validit y (Creswell, 1998).
4.1. Samples
Three schools were selected fro m the five schools of a district, in Ibb governorate. One of
these schools is mixed, i.e., bo ys and girls. The second school is a girl school and the third
school is a bo y school. These schools were chosen as they were appropriate
representatives o f other secondary schools in such a district in terms o f teachers and
students. All the teachers o f these schools (15 teachers) were observed and ten out of these
teachers were interviewed. These teachers have taught English for more than five years.
The observat ions were conducted during the normal teaching classes. Each teacher was
observed for three periods (lessons). Each period lasted for 45 minutes.
4.2. Instruments
A structured observat ion chick list and interviews were primarily prepared by t he
researcher, who has been teaching and training TEFL in-service teachers as well as
undergraduate pre-service teachers in UAE and Yemen for more than 15 years. Then, both
instruments were given to four members of the English and educat ional departments at Ibb
Universit y, who are experts in educat ional research and English educat ion to ensure face
and content validit y. Guided by their co mments and notes, a final draft was developed.
The final observation chick list consisted of seventeen items dealing with the teaching of
language skills, grammar, functions, using co mmunicat ive act ivit ies, pair and group work
and so on (see Table 1). Four-point scale (always, sometimes, rarely and never) was used
in order to avoid the subject ivit y of the observer and to quantify the data. All the classes
attended were observed in full. The interview consists of six main questions (See the
appendix). However, during the interviews so me elaboration in the quest ions and answers
were allowed.
4.3. Data analysis
Percentages were used to present the data gathered from the observat ion by calculat ing the
number o f observations (3 observat ions x 15 teachers, i.e. periods =45 observat ions) to
quant ify the data guided by four-point scale (always, somet imes, rarely and never).
Wit h regard to the interviews, each interview was first carefully reviewed and transcribed
verbat im. Then, it was categorized in accordance with the quest ions and themes o f this
research tool (See the appendix).
5. Results and Discussion
This section presents the results and discussio n in accordance wit h the order of the aims
and quest ions of the study.
5.1. Yemeni English Teachers’ Classroom Teaching Practices
International Refereed & Indexed Journal of English Language & Translation Studies
ISSN: 2308-5460
October-December, 2013
www.eltsjournal.org
P a ge | 4 7
International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies Vol:1, Issue: 3
An Exploration of English Language Teaching Pedagogy………
Al-Sohbani, Y. A.
Table: 1 Percentage of the Results Obtained from the Observation Checklist
The Observation Statements
Always
Sometimes
Rarely
Never
Students work in groups/ pairs
0 %
0 %
6. 6 %
93. 3 %
Teachers distribute direct ions
and 0 %
6. 6 %
13. 3 %
80 %
invo lve all students.
Teachers create realist ic situat ions.
0 %
6. 6 %
20 %
73. 3 %
Teachers use dialogues based on socia l 6.6 %
13. 3 %
20 %
60 %
life.
Teacher’s talk-time is dominant.
93. 3 %
6. 6 %
0 %
0 %
Student’s talk-t ime is dominant.
0 %
0 %
13. 3 %
86. 6 %
Teachers focus on linguist ic
forms 93.3 %
6. 6 %
0 %
0 %
(grammar to be learnt).
Students correct themselves.
6. 6 %
13. 3 %
20 %
60 %
Teachers focus on all four skills 0 %
0 %
0 %
100 %
(writ ing-reading-speaking-listening).
Teachers use L1 (Arabic).
80 %
20 %
0%
0 %
Students use L1 (Arabic).
86. 6 %
13. 3 %
0%
0 %
Teachers always translate meanings o f 60 %
33. 3 %
6. 6 %
0 %
words, word-for-word.
Teachers use audio-visual aids.
0%
6. 6 %
20 %
73. 3 %
Teachers focus on fluency.
0 %
0 %
6. 6 %
93. 3 %
Teachers elicit responses from students. 0 %
13. 3 %
20 %
66. 6 %
Teachers feel that students are 0 %
6. 6 %
13. 3 %
80 %
mot ivated.
Teaches use a lesson plan.
0 %
13. 3 %
20 %
66. 6 %
As seen in Table 1, one can say that the observed teachers do not implement the CLT.
Instead, GTM seems to be the main method fo llowed which is pedagogically not
appropriate to prepare students to communicate in English. The teachers, as observed
most ly, do not create situations and use dialogues based on social life, indicat ing that CLT
in the English classrooms has not been implemented. Teachers use GTM because it is easy
to fo llow as it does not require them to prepare well nor it requires them to be competent
in English. Further, the backwash of examinat ions, which are st ill tradit ional and focus on
linguist ic knowledge like grammar, could have its effect. Hughes (1989) states that "The
effect of testing on teaching and learning is known as backwash. Backwash can be harmful
or beneficial. If a test is regarded as important then preparation for it can co me to
dominate all teaching and learning act ivit ies” (p. 1). Moreover, studies o f Karim (2004)
and Liao (2003) have also indicated that teachers fo llowed formal-based instruction in
order to help their learners pass the exams.
Consequent ly, teacher-centeredness seems to be dominat ing which might have negat ively
prevented students fro m participating in the class. They appeared to be passive rather than
actively invo lved in learning. They sat st ill o n their chairs while the teacher stood in front
International Refereed & Indexed Journal of English Language & Translation Studies
ISSN: 2308-5460
October-December, 2013
www.eltsjournal.org
P a ge | 4 8
International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies Vol:1, Issue: 3
An Exploration of English Language Teaching Pedagogy………
Al-Sohbani, Y. A.
of the class lecturing and directing them mo stly in Arabic even for funct ions that could be
simply acco mplished in English. Though frequent use of mother-tongue is supposed not to
be encouraged in CLT classes and it is allowed only when there is no alternatives, the use
of Arabic, both by teachers and students, has been frequent in the Yemeni Englis h
language classrooms.
This excessive use of Arabic in the classroom has also been confirmed by the majorit y o f
the teachers (7 teachers, i.e. 70%) who participated in the interview. These teachers
ment ioned different reasons for using Arabic. The most important reasons they pointed out
were as to explain grammar rules, show the meaning of new words, to “help the students
understand English easily and clearly” (Teacher 1) and to “clarify certain unclear po ints to
the students” (Teacher 6). Two teachers (Teachers 6 & 8) thought that using Arabic
mot ivated students to learn English.
Abbas, Aslam and Yasmeen (2011) claim t hat CLT develops all four skills. However, as
given in Table 1, the statement number nine shows that 100 % of the classes observed
have not focused on the skills. That is, students have not been engaged in co mmunication.
The attention is paid to teaching grammat ical rules only.
The learners have been deprived fro m listening to English even fro m teachers to listen to
some English because, as illustrated in statement number ten (Table 1), the majorit y o f the
teachers were observed using Arabic which could have negat ively influenced learners to
do the same, i.e., using Arabic. This result leads us to say that the implementation o f CLT
is missing and could be one o f the reasons that caused students’ poor proficiency in
English. As seen in the table, 60 % of the observed teachers used word-for-word
translat ion, indicating that other techniques of conveying meaning such as pictures and
realia, that facilitates learning, help clarifying for learners meaning, and as a result
minimize the use o f Arabic, have not been ut ilized adequately. Statement 13, which shows
most teachers of English (73, 3 %) support this.
In short, language skills have been neglected in the classrooms observed. The main focus
of the who le teaching process has been noticed mainly to familiarize learners with
grammar rather than developing their co mmunicat ive co mpetence. That is, teachers pay no
attention to help students use the language according to the principles of the
communicat ive approach.
5.2. Teachers’ Awareness of CLT
In order to explore the teachers’ awareness of the CLT, they were asked to say what
methodology Yemeni English textbooks are based on and to define the CLT. Only four
teachers said that CLT is the method which the textbooks are based on, whereas six
teachers do not have clear-cut idea regarding the Yemeni texts-books’ methodology. This
can be supported by the fo llowing excerpts:
Teacher: 5 “It is based on many facilit ies, but they are not available.”
Teacher: 8 “I think more of them are based on grammar and dialogues and
[little] of exercises.”
Teacher: 1 “Reading texts and then clarifying the main idea and discussing
the rules of grammar.”
International Refereed & Indexed Journal of English Language & Translation Studies
ISSN: 2308-5460
October-December, 2013
www.eltsjournal.org
P a ge | 4 9
International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies Vol:1, Issue: 3
An Exploration of English Language Teaching Pedagogy………
Al-Sohbani, Y. A.
Teacher: 10 “Just learning grammar but not all skills.”
Teacher: 2 “New words, grammar, writ ing and reading.”
Teacher: 9 “I think it is descript ive. It isn’t communicat ive enough; focusing
on grammar.”
These result s suggests that the majorit y o f English teachers may not be aware that the CLT
is the method which is supposed to be fo llowed, indicat ing that there has not been
adequate training done for such teachers to familiarize them with the nature of the
textbooks and require them to practice the CLT under pro fessio nal trainers. This might
have led them to resort to traditional pedagogy. As Li (1998) states the difficult ies teachers
in South Korea faced to use the CLT were attributed to the lack of appropriate training.
According to Sato and Kleinsasser (1999) and Tho mpson (1996), if teachers do not
thoroughly understand the CLT, they go to tradit ional methods of language teaching.
The participants have defined CLT different ly. The fo llo wing excerpts, which have been
presented verbat im, illustrate this.
Teacher: 6 “CLT method is a modern method in language learning. It
depends on new and standard ways, act ivit ies, techniques, etc. It stands in
giving chances to the students instead being passive.”
Here, this teacher means that one of the CLT goals is to create activit ies, techniques and so
on in which learners are invo lved in rather than being merely passive and get what is
provided by teachers. This sounds good, however, in pract ice it was observed that all
teachers did not implement the CLT, indicat ing that there is a mismatch between what is
said and what is pract iced. Thiks seems similar to the result of Fun’ study (1998) which
showed that Hong Kong English teachers were theoretically speaking in favour of the
CLT, however, in pract ice they implemented tradit io nal methods. This can be due to the
factors discussed above, e.g. examinat ions’ backwash, and the requirement of the CLT
lesson preparation and the practical constraints (See section 2). The fo llowing excerpts
indicate thisTeacher 1, “it is very important and the best method in the world, but
applying it in the Yemeni class is, to some extent, difficult.”
Teacher: 9 “ it is the method which takes care o f all main skills that enlarge
the students’ minds, but in my opinion the teacher is the main responsible to
help students use the language by creat ing/ giving them a chance to practice,
but, unfortunately in our environment it is absent because it is difficult.”
The fo llowing definit io ns also show the differences among the part icipants regarding their
understanding of the nature and concepts o f the CLT to support what has been briefly
reviewed earlier.
Teacher: 10 “CLT is the method of teaching which is based on pract icing
English mo stly inside the classroom.”
Teacher: 8 “CLT is to teach students how to read, speak and write correctly,
and it is to teach students how to communicate with each other by speaking
English.”
International Refereed & Indexed Journal of English Language & Translation Studies
ISSN: 2308-5460
October-December, 2013
www.eltsjournal.org
P a ge | 5 0
International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies Vol:1, Issue: 3
An Exploration of English Language Teaching Pedagogy………
Al-Sohbani, Y. A.
Teacher: 7 “it is a very important method that makes students use language in
communicat ion-in real life.”
Teacher: 5 “It gives the students a big chance to communicate either with the
teacher or among themselves.”
Teacher: 4 “how to practice the language or use it in our real life situat ion.”
Teacher: 3 “I think it is the best way to teach English language, because
English is co mmunicat ive rather than anything.”
Teacher: 2 “CLT is to ask and answer each other in English language by
using spoken …, grammar, reading and writ ing.”
Based on the definit io ns, provided above, most teachers seem to have quite adequate
knowledge o f the CLT. However, practically they do not fo llow the CLT on one hand,
they are not clear, about what they do in the classroom, on the other, supporting what has
been noticed during the observat ion, and at the same time it reveals the misconcept ion
among these teachers regarding the principles o f the CLT. The excerpts given below ma y
help to understand thisTeacher: 1 “Learning by co mparison to Arabic grammar and meaning.
Educating the students of the British culture which relates to language.”
Teacher: 2 “Asking quest ions about the previous lesson, writ ing new words in
the blackboard, presents the lesson, students work in groups ask the students
some questions.”
Teacher: 3 “I make the students participate more. I explain the lesson first and
I make students read a lot.”
Teacher: 4 “Arabic translat ion is most used by me.”
Teacher: 7 “Co mmunicat ive and grammat ical method.”
Teacher: 8 “I always fo llow the method of reading, writ ing and answering
exercises.”
Teacher: 9 “Discussing and making groups.”
Teacher: 10 “I use posters and somet imes cassettes.”
5.3. The Constraints faced by the teachers while implementing the CLT
Based on the data of the interviews, it was observed that the participants considered
crowded classes as the most important factor that made them unable to implement the
CLT. This is inconsistent with Farea’ study (2012), aimed to explore the difficult ies facing
114 Yemeni English language school teachers, which instead revealed the lack o f training
as the major factor hindering teachers to implement the CLT. Nevertheless, the finding of
the present study are in line wit h that of Li (1998), Burnaby and Sun (1989) and Hu (2002)
who reported that teachers perceive class size as a constraint for implement ing the CLT in
their schools.
Various other reasons like lack o f teaching aids, cassettes, students’ mot ivat ion and
parents’ encouragement were also ment ioned by t he participants of this study as obstacles
that act against the implementation o f the CLT. The teachers see their learners unable to
learn English. This can be due to wrong beliefs among such teachers, which leads them
consciously, or unconsciously, to implement ineffective teaching techniques such as using
International Refereed & Indexed Journal of English Language & Translation Studies
ISSN: 2308-5460
October-December, 2013
www.eltsjournal.org
P a ge | 5 1
International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies Vol:1, Issue: 3
An Exploration of English Language Teaching Pedagogy………
Al-Sohbani, Y. A.
Arabic and fo llowing spoon-feeding approach. According to Pajares (1992) teachers’
lessons planning, their decisio ns and their classroom teaching practices were greatly
influenced by t heir beliefs. Similarly, Barcelos and Woods, as cited in Mills (2011),
suggest, “beliefs play a pro minent role in many aspects of teaching wit h their influence on
teaching performance and instructional cho ices” (p. 62).
Learners’ social problems, limited use o f English in Yemen, the short time o f the period,
the absence of labs and modern techno logy and the design o f the textbook have been also
reported as so me other constraints that according to the participants hinder them fro m
implement ing the CLT.
6. Conclusions and Recommendations
It was observed that the Yemeni teachers’ pedagogies are mainly tradit ional, grammaroriented; teacher-centered that might have been affected by t heir experience as learners
and examinat ions, which are grammar based. That is, group/ pair works were not used and
the four language skills were not practiced. The use of mother tongues, both by teachers
and students, were noticed to be the prevailing. The meanings o f words were given in
Arabic, the teachers did not focus on developing students’ fluency rather they focused on
grammar, and their talking time was found to be dominat ing.
Further, it is revealed that the part icipants do not have clear-cut idea regarding the
principles and concepts of the CLT and are not clear about what they do in the classroom.
Crowded classes were considered as the most important constraint, which hinders the
implementation of the CLT, fo llowed by lack of teaching aids, cassettes, students’
mot ivat ion and parents’ encouragement.
It is also important to note here that the results of this case study are based on a limited
number of samples. Therefore, conducting a further research can be reco mmended
elsewhere in Yemen and wit h a large number of samples, which may result in clearer and
different results.
However, it can be said that a professio nal development program should be established
with the aim o f familiarizing Yemeni English language teachers wit h textbooks, updating
their knowledge of the CLT pedagogies and providing them wit h opportunit ies for the
practical applicat ion of such pedagogies in the Yemeni context. If this is done, then, most
of the prevailing problems, which hinder the implementation o f the CLT pedagogy in the
Yemeni English language classrooms, can be over come and help in achieving the rea l
aims and object ives of teaching English in Yemen.
About the Author:
Yehia Ahmed Al-Sohbani works as an associate professor in applied linguist ics wit h the
Department of English Studies, Universit y o f Ibb, Yemen. His main research interests are
language learning motivation, language learning strategies, teacher education, teacher
development and teaching methods. He has also published art icles on various topics such
as - reading strategies, translat ion and ELT methods etc.
International Refereed & Indexed Journal of English Language & Translation Studies
ISSN: 2308-5460
October-December, 2013
www.eltsjournal.org
P a ge | 5 2
International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies Vol:1, Issue: 3
An Exploration of English Language Teaching Pedagogy………
Al-Sohbani, Y. A.
Works Cited:
Abbas, F., Aslam, S. and Yasmeen, R. (2011). Communicat ive Language Teaching: A
Modified Version. Language in India, 11 (4) April.
Al-Qahtani, M. (2009). "Tradit ional methods of teaching English in so me Yemeni
schools", Yemen Times, 2 Mach, 2009.
Al-Shamiry, R. (2000). Yemeni Learners’ Oral Communicat ive Co mpetence in English: A
Study at the Tertiary Level. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Hyderabad,
India.
Al-Sohbani, Y. A. (1997). Attitudes and Motivation of Yemeni Secondary School Students
and English Language Learning. Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis, Department
of English, Universit y o f Pune, India.
Bataineh, R. Bataineh, R. and Thabet, S. (2011). Communicat ive Language Teaching in
the Yemeni EFL Classroom: Embraced or Merely Lip-serviced?. Journal of
Language Teaching and Research, (2) 4, pp. 859-866.
Berns, M. (1990). Context of competence: social and cultural considerat ions in
communicative language teaching. New York: Plenum Press.
Best, J., & Kahn, J. (1998). Research in education (8th ed.): Allyn and Bacon.
Bose, M. N. (2002). A Textbook of English language teaching (ELT) for Yemeni
Students: A guide for teaching English in Yemeni schools: Obadi studies and
Publishing center.
Brown, D. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language
Pedagogy. San Francisco: Longman Inc.
Brumfit, C.J. (1984). Communicative Methodology in Language Teaching. Cambridge:
Cambridge Universit y Press.
Burnaby, B., & Sun, Y. (1989). Chinese teachers’ views of western language teaching:
Context informs paradigms. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 219-238.
Cook, G. (2005). Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford Universit y Press.
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
designs. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ellis, R. (1982). Informal and formal approaches to communicative language teaching.
ELT Journal 36(2).
Ellis, G. (1996). How culturally appropriate is the communicat ive approach? ELT
Journal, 50(3), 213-218.
Farea, Q. (2012). Difficult ies encountered by EL teachers in implementing
communicative approach in Yemen schools. The University Researcher: A
Quarterly Refereed Journal. Science and Humanit ies, 28, 67-94.
Fun, W. S. (1998). Teachers Perceptions of Co mmunicat ive Language Teaching in Hong
Kong Secondary language Classroom: An Invest igat ion into the
implementation of the Syllabus for English (Forms 1-5). Unpublished MA
Dissertation, Hong Kong, China.
Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and learning in the language classroom New York: Oxford.
Holliday, A. (1994). Appropriate methodology and social context. Cambridge: Cambridge
International Refereed & Indexed Journal of English Language & Translation Studies
ISSN: 2308-5460
October-December, 2013
www.eltsjournal.org
P a ge | 5 3
International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies Vol:1, Issue: 3
An Exploration of English Language Teaching Pedagogy………
Al-Sohbani, Y. A.
Universit y Press.
Howatt, A.P.R. (1984). A History of English Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford
Universit y Press.
Hughes, A. (1989). Testing for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge Universit y
Press.
Hubbard, P, Jones, H. Thronton, B. & Wheeler, R. (1983). A Training Course for TEFL.
Oxford: Oxford Universit y Press.
Hu, G. (2002). Potential Cultural Resistance to Pedagogical Imports: The Case of
Communicat ive Language Teaching in China. Language, Culture and
Curriculum, 15(2), 93-105.
Hymes, D. H. (1972). On communicat ive competence. In C. J. Brumfit, & K. Johnson
(Eds.). The communicative approach to language teaching (2nd ed., pp. 5-27).
Oxford: Oxford Universit y Press.
Johnson, K. (1982). Communicative Syllabus Design and Methodology. Oxford:
Pergamon.
Karavas-Doukas, E. (1996). Using attitude scales to invest igate teachers’ attitudes to the
communicative approach. ELT Journal 50 (3): 87–197.
Karim, K. M. R. (2004). Teachers' perceptions, attitudes, and expectations about
communicative language teaching (CLT) in post-secondary education in
Bangladesh. Unpublished master thesis, Universit y o f Victoria.
Knight, P. (2007) “The Development of EFL Methodology” In Candlin, C. and Mercer,
N. (eds.) English language teaching in its social contexts. London: Routledge.
pp.147-166.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (1993). Maximizing learning potential in the communicative
classroom. ELT Journal 46 (1), 12–21.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and Principles in language Teaching. Oxford:
Oxford Universit y Press.
Lee, J., & Van Patten, B. (1 995). Making communicative language teaching happen. New
York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Li, D. (1998). It's always more difficult than you plan and imagine: Teachers' perceived
difficult ies in introducing the co mmunicative approach in South Korea.
TESOL Quarterly, 32(4), 677-703.
Liao, X. Q. (2000). Communicat ive language teaching innovat ion in China: Difficult ies
and solut ions. Retrieved fro m ERIC database (ED 443294).
Liao, X. (2003). Chinese secondary school teacher’s attitude toward communicative
language teaching and their classroom practice. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Universit y o f Auckland.
Liao, W. W. (2006). High school teachers' belief and implementation of CLT in Taiwan.
Unpublished master thesis, National Taiwan Normal Universit y.
Littlewood, W. (1981). Language teaching. An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge
Universit y Press.
Munby, J. (1978). Communicative syllabus design. Cambridge: Cambridge Universit y
International Refereed & Indexed Journal of English Language & Translation Studies
ISSN: 2308-5460
October-December, 2013
www.eltsjournal.org
P a ge | 5 4
International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies Vol:1, Issue: 3
An Exploration of English Language Teaching Pedagogy………
Al-Sohbani, Y. A.
Press.
Pajares, M. F.(1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educat ional research: cleaning up a messy
construct. Review o f Educational Research, 62, 307-332.
McDonough, J. & Shaw, C. (2003). Materials and Methods in ELT a Teachers’ Guide.
Miles, M., &Huberman A. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook
(2nd ed.). London: Sage publication International Educat ional &
Professio nal Publisher.
Mills, S. (2011). Teaching Assistants’ Self-Efficacy in Teaching Literature: Sources,
Personal Assessments, and Consequences. The Modern Language
Journal, 95, 61-80.
Nakata, Y. (1990). Language Acquisition and English education in Japan: A
Sociolinguistic Approach. Tokyo: Koyo Shobo.
Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge:
Cambridge Universit y Press.
Omaggio, A. (2000). Teaching Language in Context. Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
Prodromou, L. (1991). The good language teacher. English Teaching Forum, 29: 2–7.
Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative language teaching today. New York:
Cambridge Universit y Press.
Richards, J., Platt, J., & Platt, H. (1992). Dictionary of language teaching & applied
linguistics. London: Longman.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language
teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge Universit y Press.
Sato, K. &Kleinsasser, R. C. (1999). Communicative language teaching (CLT): Practical
understanding. The Modern Language Journal, 83, 494-517.
Savitri, M. (2010). Teaching English as a Second Language Using Co mmunicat ive
Language Teaching: An Evaluat ion of Practice in India. Language in India,
9(10), 129-140.
Savignon, S. J. (1987). Communicat ive Language Teaching. Theory into Practice, 26(4),
235- 242.
Sapsford, R., &Jupp, V. (Eds.). (1996). Data Collection and Analys is. London: Sage
Publicat ion.
Su, P. (1990). The effect iveness of role-play act ivities in learning English as a foreign
language by Chinese co llege students. Dissertation Abstract International,
51(10), 252. (UMI No. 9035073).
Thabet, S. (2002). Obstacles of Using Co mmunicative Techniques in Yemeni English
Foreign Language Classes. Unpublished MA Thesis, Yarmouk Universit y,
Jordan.
Thompson, G. (1996). Some Misconcept ions about Communicat ive Language Teaching.
ELT Journal 50(1), 9-15.
Tsai, T. H. (2007). Taiwanese educators' perspective on the implementation of the new
English education policy. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Alliant
International Universit y.
International Refereed & Indexed Journal of English Language & Translation Studies
ISSN: 2308-5460
October-December, 2013
www.eltsjournal.org
P a ge | 5 5
International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies Vol:1, Issue: 3
An Exploration of English Language Teaching Pedagogy………
Al-Sohbani, Y. A.
Widdowson, H.G. (1978). Teaching language as communicat ion. Oxford: Oxford
Universit y Press.
Yalden, J. (1987). The communicative syllabus: evaluat ion, design and implementation.
Englewood, N. J.: Prentice Hall International.
Yu, L. (2001). Communicat ive language teaching in China: Progress and resistance.
TESOL Quarterly, 35(1), 194-179.
International Refereed & Indexed Journal of English Language & Translation Studies
ISSN: 2308-5460
October-December, 2013
www.eltsjournal.org
P a ge | 5 6
International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies Vol:1, Issue: 3
An Exploration of English Language Teaching Pedagogy………
Al-Sohbani, Y. A.
Appendix
Interviews Questions
1-Do you use Arabic when you are teaching Englis h in the EFL classroom? For what
Purpose/s?
2- Do you think the use of Arabic increase your students’ motivation posit ively toward
learning the language?
3-What methodology Yemeni English Textbooks is based on?
4-What are the main methods do you fo llow in the classroom?
5-Please define in your own words Communicat ive Language Teaching?
6-What are the difficult ies which face Yemeni English language teachers to fo llow the
CLT?
International Refereed & Indexed Journal of English Language & Translation Studies
ISSN: 2308-5460
October-December, 2013
www.eltsjournal.org
P a ge | 5 7